Re: OCR/barcode reliability

From: Arthur Keller <arthur_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Wed Jun 02 2004 - 21:30:15 CDT

At 9:21 PM -0400 6/2/04, David Mertz wrote:
>On Jun 2, 2004, at 8:01 PM, Arthur Keller wrote:
>>Barcodes are also more reliable than OCR.
>I find this claim unlikely if we are talking about OCR fonts like
>OCR-A. At the least it is not supportable without some empirical
>evidence. Strong counter-evidence is provided by the banking
>industry, who process literally billions of checks every day, with
>extremely low error rates, using OCR fonts.

Banks use MICR not straight OCR. That's Magnetic Ink. And the MICR
encoding is more redundant that straight OCR is.

Best regards,

Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Wed Jun 30 23:17:04 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Jun 30 2004 - 23:17:29 CDT